good one @pvs, OP clearly missed their deliverable amb their failure of flawless execution of connectivity of progressive performance management to SOs, which demonstrates poor stakeholder management. It's my tpov that OP would benefit from using bkm for increasing their competency level wrt effective communication. OP likely won't disagree and commit, because OP doesn't understand a word of what I've just said.
11 replies (most recent on top)
I think I get it... Sort of...
No you are just fine. No need to worry. You would have been promoted immediately to the exit door.
OP should drop the strawman and level on the roadmap. The key players need a 10000 foot view before they can commit.
whenever I see posts where ppl are asking for definitions of terms and TLAs that ALL Intel ee's should know I ignore them, it's obvi they are not employees.
....what's hysterical is that OP has the SSL transposed from the way it works at Intel, and posted thinking that SSL1 is negative...that's how you can tell it's a troll.
Agree.... this claim is ridiculous on its face. You (or representation there-of... i.e., fictional Intel employee), would have been fired years ago. No such legacy, as falsely described, can exist at Intel.
Is that you BK?
how tall are you?
Get outta here! If this were a true case, the person would be gone on the 2nd consecutive IR/BE message...Intel, nor any other good company should waste time on people that continually perform poorly and get negative messages.
Non-Intel Troll, unfortunately you got almost all of your terminology incorrect and have just embarrassed yourself to everyone on here...thank you for making it so obvious that you are not an Intel employee.